ours had the same good lord. I believe also, that if
Julian had been written and calculated for the Parisians, as it was
for our sectaries, one of their sheriffs might have mistaken too, and
called him Julian the Apostle.[8] I suppose I need not push this point
any further; where the parallel was intended, I am certain it will
reach; but a larger account of the proceedings in the city may be
expected from a better hand, and I have no reason to forestall it.[9]
In the mean time, because there has been no actual rebellion, the
faction triumph in their loyalty; which if it were out of principle,
all our divisions would soon be ended, and we the happy people, which
God and the constitution of our government have put us in condition to
be; but so long as they take it for a maxim, that the king is but an
officer in trust, that the people, or their representatives, are
superior to him, judges of miscarriages, and have power of revocation,
it is a plain case, that whenever they please they may take up arms;
and, according to their doctrine, lawfully too. Let them jointly
renounce this one opinion, as in conscience and law they are bound to
do, because both scripture and acts of parliament oblige them to it,
and we will then thank their obedience for our quiet, whereas now we
are only beholden to them for their fear. The miseries of the last war
are yet too fresh in all men's memory; and they are not rebels, only
because they have been so too lately. An author of theirs has told us
roundly the west-country proverb; _Chud eat more cheese, and chad it;_
their stomach is as good as ever it was; but the mischief on't is,
they are either muzzled, or want their teeth. If there were as many
fanatics now in England, as there were christians in the empire, when
Julian reigned, I doubt we should not find them much inclined to
passive obedience; and, "Curse ye Meroz"[10] would be oftener preached
upon, than "Give to Caesar," except in the sense Mr Hunt means it.

Having clearly shewn wherein the parallel consisted, which no man can
mistake, who does not wilfully, I need not justify myself, in what
concerns the sacred person of his majesty. Neither the French history,
nor our own, could have supplied me, nor Plutarch himself, were he now
alive, could have found a Greek or Roman to have compared to him, in
that eminent virtue of his clemency; even his enemies must acknowledge
it to be superlative, because they live by it. Far be it from
flat